U.S. vs Arzberger


PDA






krishl
January 12, 2009, 12:18 PM
For your legal reading enjoyment, jump over to the Volokh Conspiracy, where there's an article about this case:
The First (?) Post-Heller Case Holding a Gun Control Law Unconstitutional (http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_01_11-2009_01_17.shtml#1231712651)

Chris

If you enjoyed reading about "U.S. vs Arzberger" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Old Fuff
January 12, 2009, 12:40 PM
Very interesting for a number of reasons. Thank you for posting the link. ;)

Duke of Doubt
January 12, 2009, 01:19 PM
The reasoning is unassailable.

Assuming similar reasoning is applied, this eventually should spell the end of that part of the 1993 Violence Against Women Act which prohibits those subject to a temporary or permanent protective order from possessing firearms ABSENT A HEARING on the special risk posed by the person subject to the order.

Frank Ettin
January 12, 2009, 02:18 PM
Good reasoning -- too bad it's only a District Court ruling. If we can start getting some opinions on these lines from some courts of appeal we'll really be getting somewhere.

Flyboy
January 12, 2009, 02:32 PM
This is going to be particularly interesting if the Bradys (and a few of their supporters on this very board) succeed in getting people's rights infringed for merely appearing on the terrorist watch list.

everallm
January 12, 2009, 04:16 PM
This is just the sort of case law that is necessary to build on from Heller.

I firmly expect that the finding will be appealed and if upheld could also be a particularly useful tool for review of other restrictive laws such as Lautenberg.

And all from NYC as well........:D

If you enjoyed reading about "U.S. vs Arzberger" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!